a) Back of the envelope numbers indicate pretty high multiples.
Pages
Search This Blog
Friday, January 6, 2023
Who Are You, and What Is Your End Game?
a) Back of the envelope numbers indicate pretty high multiples.
Sunday, December 18, 2022
Dec 2022 Portfolio and EOY Summary
As of 18-Dec (Sunday),
S&P 500 Index Fund: -13.77%-> -17.36%
Hong Kong Tracker Fund: -17.22% -> -12.31%
Straits Times Index Fund: 8.24% -> 7.36%
My portfolio: -18.17% -> -12.17%
Transactions:
Further increase in Singapore Saving Bonds and Singapore T-bills. As explained earlier, these are for my mum. I have been laddering the investment-- for the uninitiated, it means to break up the total sum available for investment, instead of investing the total in 1 lump sum.
An example: assuming you have $100,000 to invest in t-bills. If you do laddering, that would mean:
Invest $20000 in Dec
Invest $20000 in Jan
Tuesday, November 29, 2022
November 2022 Portfolio Update
As of end of trading 29-Nov-2022,
S&P 500 Index Fund: -15.43% -> -13.77%
Hong Kong Tracker Fund: -29.32% -> -17.22% (huge improvement in 1 month)
Straits Times Index Fund: 0.92% -> 8.24% (such optimism had nearly gone unnoticed)
My portfolio: -21.48% -> -18.17% (not much improvement)
Transactions:
1) Increase in T-Bills purchase for my mum
2) Modest increase in OKP
3) Modest increase in Alibaba (9988).
Commentary:
Portfolio lagged against indices this month, particularly Hong Kong. This is because much of the holdings are in Central China holdings-- which did not receive as much optimistic buy-ins as compared to its bigger, more well-known peers. I believe the boost in prices came from buy-ins from Chinese investors, and Central China positions are taken off stock-connect some time back.
I am more concern with my family life, as my mum suffered a huge episode of high blood sugar, and had to be sent to the hospital. She was warded in high dependency ward and subsequently in a normal ward. I spent the first day largely sleepless, as the hospital called in every couple of hours to report status; a blood test here, an urgent procedure next, and so on.
Now mum is safely back home. But life would never be the same again. Before this, we were much more careless with high glucose readings. Dosage has been raised, but readings remain stubbornly high. Luckily we are visiting the diabetes doctor next week.
Monday, November 21, 2022
CCRE liabilites: A mountain to climb
![]() |
| Daily falls of 8% and more is common with this stock. |
Central China Real Estate (CCRE) is one of my sizable investments. It is one of those "high risk, high reward" bets, and probably the riskiest. Here is a note to myself, perhaps as a reminder to never take such bets again.
It is well known that the company balance sheet is in great trouble. Its share price currently reflect a price to book of... 7 cents to 1 dollar of asset.
Looking at their interim report in late Sep 2022, the numbers look equally ugly.
Short Term Debt,
...of bank loans and other loans, 5761.86m
...of senior notes, 5354.493m
Long Term Debt,
...of bank loans 3551.778m
...of senior notes, 10972.022m
=================
Payables,
...51622.988m (!!!!), of which 40B of it does not involve associates or entities controlled by the owner.
==================
Assets
... stated as Inventories, of which are Properties, under development 88075.223m (could this figure be trusted, since property prices are falling?)
... of properties already developed: 6554.351m
Cash: 3622.412m
Restricted bank deposits: 2885.414
Receivables: 5548.762
==================
as of now, the only good news is very publicly known: Henan Tongshenzhiye would be issued 29.01% of the shares float for a convertible bond, yielding 5% at 708m HKD. IMO, this is not a large sum and conditions laid out are not publicly stated.
If we were to trust the asset value, it sums up to a total of 106686m, or 106.7B.
The liabilities (including the monstrous payables), total up to 77263m or 77.263B.
As such, it is clear that the market believes the property sales will suffer for a long time, and/or the value of the properties (be it developed or still developing) are overstated.
I am cautiously watching for news and believe that short of a miracle, it will be a long, winter-like wait till the company emerges from the weight of its troubles.
一年一年过。
Tuesday, November 15, 2022
The Resumption of Best World
Best World resumed trading yesterday. Prior to that, it had conducted two "equal access buyback offers," both at arguably very low prices of 1.36$. I wrote an opinion after the first exercise was announced. I do think that the price was opportunistic.
So on Monday, I surmise that the patient and opportunistic bunch would bid up the prices. They did. From the open price of 1.47 (an 8% over the buyback price), to a day high of 1.87 (up 37.5%). The market calmed down and ended at 1.82.
Today, on the second day of trading, saw sell down till 1.57, representing a decline of 13.7%. It was pretty volatile, and ended with a doji candlestick pattern of 1.64. Volume on both days does not differ significantly.
At 1.64$ a share, and 440.121093 million shares (based on the latest announcement of share buy back conducted today), this means Best World is priced as follows, based on the 3Q filings:
Market Capitalization: 721.79m
Cash and Eq: 356.918m
Inventory: 77.352m
Receivables: 20.027m
Total Liabilites: 209.6m
Should we discount the value of inventories and receivables by 50% each, without discounting any for cash and eq, the quick and dirty net asset is of 198.9m, or round off to about 200m.
This means that a shareholder is paying 521.8m dollars in effect for a company that had been earning 54m (in 2017) to 140-ish million (2018, 2020, and 2021). It earned 70m in 2019. Based on any year, none of them look too demanding. 3Q filings does register decline in cash flows on a y-o-y basis.
The biggest contributor to its coffers appear to be still from China. So the worsening numbers could reasonably be attributed to the country's COVID control policies.
If one would had know that trading would resume in a matter of months, no reasonable shareholder would have participated in the equal access offer. None of the executive directors sold-- that would be expected. Those who sold had their money stuck in there for way too long.
What caught my eye is that board members, particularly the non-exec directors, as well as senior management largely remained in the company.
Purchasing Best World shares at the moment is difficult on a couple of counts: first, one would be aware of the possibility that the company would run foul of regulations/laws. Since board membership remains largely the same, I think the probability of it is low.
The second reason is likely price anchoring given how the stock surged on day 1. Maybe it would be easier to look at it from a value point of view; if there is still a huge gap between value and price, a 30% surge on a day might mean little.
So my back of the envelope math tells me:
Since the "net" asset is about 200m, and cash flow is about 100-140m in recent times, a no-growth multiple of 7-8, based on an assumption that it would earn about 90m yearly, means this company is worth about 200m + (630m to 720m) which round off to~ 830m to 920m. These are very "safe" and conservative numbers, indicating a margin of safety of only 15-27%.
The growth investor would baulk at these numbers and rightly so. But this is the stock market, and the market is never kind to companies that don't grow, no matter how much free cash they threw off yearly.
The market and media, laughingly, would only claim that such a company is too cheap when they attempt to go private. Otherwise by and large they are believers of efficient markets.
If you would believe that the company could earn about 120m and ascribe a multiple of 10, that would mean the company is worth 1400m, an upside of about 100%! Valuation is very personal.
Given what happen to my portfolio in 2022, I think it is fine to be too conservative.
As of writing, I do not have any positions in Best World.
Friday, October 28, 2022
Oct 2022 Portfolio Update
As of end of trading 30-Sep-2022,
S&P 500 Index Fund: -19.23% -> -15.43%
Hong Kong Tracker Fund: -19.48% -> -29.32%
Straits Times Index Fund: 3.17% -> 0.92%
My portfolio: -15.13% -> -21.48%
The Hang Seng Index was a train wreck this week. On the first trading day after unveiling the Politburo, it feel just about 6%, recover slightly during the middle of the week, only to fall 3% on Friday, with the tech index enduring a worse fate.
YTD, HSI's red ink exceed 30% with ease. If you had bought the Hang Seng index fund in 2016, you will still be losing money today.
My portfolio, which consist of almost 40% in Hong Kong stocks, is not spared from the torrid, horrifying HSI sell downs.
As for my own portfolio, -6% is actually way worse than it look, because of a huge amount of purchase in T-Bills this month. Without it, I am looking at likely 10% down this month.
Notable transactions:
1) Very sizable amount of capital into Singapore T-Bills, as parents are looking to invest money kept in fixed deposits yielding less than 1%. At their age, it is not prudent to buy stocks.
2) During this week alone, I picked up
a) Yangzijiang Finance, a fair amount of it, actually. It propped to my top 5 posiitons.
b) Alibaba
c) Central China Real Estate
3) Modest amount in Nanyang Holdings (increased liquidity and selldown in prices). It is extremely difficult to purchase this
4) Liquidate Embecta to purchase some (3). Only to see Embecta go up by more than 10%....
5) Modest amount in Central China Management.
***
With unprecedented market volatility in Hong Kong markets, it is very tempting to keep buying the Singapore Treasury Bills. With an attractive (if you adopt a short term view and ignore inflation, in which both attitudes are harmful in the long run) interest rate, this seems to be what majority is doing.
But isn't investing all about not following the crowd and doing what felt painful? This fog of war is why investing is so difficult. You can't say that following the crowd is wrong; one could say that it is always the darkest before it is pitch-black.
What feels like very bad bets presently?
REITs comes to mind. With risk free interest rate going up, REITS, which ironically are suppose to be inflation-fighting instruments, are now being sold down because of interest costs. With years of zero-to-low interest environment, one could be forgiven to think this way. There will no doubt be opportunities in buying some sold down REITs.
I did consider reducing positions in Lendlease but the WALE and interest cover, does make it suitable for long-term holding. It was no doubt very depressing to see it go below the price where rights are issued (which I had subscribed). But if you had read your intelligent investor, you are a little better equipped (in the mind) to deal with broad market selldowns.
Unfortunately, nothing could prepare you when the only stocks selling down are the ones you hold, and the market is enjoying a massive rally. I think that hurts a lot more.
Saturday, October 1, 2022
Sep 2022 Portfolio Update
As of end of trading 30-Sep-2022,
S&P 500 Index Fund: -12.44%-> -19.23% (a drop of 6.79%)
Hong Kong Tracker Fund: -9.9% -> -19.48% (drop of 9.58%!!)
Straits Times Index Fund: 6.61% -> 3.17% (drop of merely 3.44)
My portfolio: -9.12% -> -15.13% (drop of 6.01%)
Transactions made:
Increase of modest amount of Central China Real Estate due to reducing prices. Unfortunately the market price of CCRE fell from my purchase price of 0.4 HKD to currently 0.315. The selldown was relentless.
Speculative purchase of token amounts of Fraser Hospitality Trust. I am currently down about 10% from this position. It was stupid.
Tuesday, August 30, 2022
August 2022 Portfolio Update
As of 30-August-2022,
S&P 500 Index Fund: -16.2% -> -12.44%
Hong Kong Tracker Fund: -5.65% -> -9.9%
Straits Times Index Fund: 1.4%-> 6.61%
My portfolio: -5.49% -> -9.12%
It is not a great feeling to see your portfolio sink when indices rises. My performance this year should be the worst ever since I started recording my investments in Stockscafe.
Wednesday, July 13, 2022
July 2022 Portfolio Update
As of 14-July-2022:
S&P 500 Index Fund: -19.97% -> -16.2%
Hong Kong Tracker Fund: -6.18% -> -5.65%
Straits Times Index Fund: 0.53% -> 1.4%
My portfolio: -2.63% -> -5.49%
Notable Transactions:
-Complete divestment of TTJ due to forceful acquisition of shares. I have tendered all but a token amount of them (in my SCB trading account). More on this in a latter section.
-Slight increase in Embecta.
-Increase in YZJ Finance in CPF due to the impending liquidation of TTJ
General Commentary
It does feel like my investments are largely inline with market performance. Most market participants would tell you that the first half of 2022 is horrid.
Superficially, my portfolio reported a 40% gain at the end of 2021. But really...the nightmare started in 2021 itself, right after the start of 2nd half 2021.
This is the trailing 12 month performance as captured by Stocks.Cafe
It should be much lower than 33%, had I not have such a huge stake in OKP (largely illiquid stock), and the 20+% upward price revision by TTJ (although it was a ridiculously low ball offer, and felt more like a loss than a gain).
What was responsible? In short, China. Bulk of the poor performance could be attributed to 4 stocks. Alibaba, Central China Management, Central China Ltd and Didi Global.
After divesting my stake in Perfect Shape (now called Perfect Medical) for a handsome gain, I was looking to put the funds to use. Now... success is a very bad teacher. I was laxed in my valuation.
Purchases in Alibaba started in Aug 2021, at the price of 160-ish HKD. We knew the price fell to 72 HKD. Through my persistent (and foolish?) buying as price fall day after day, my average price is now 115 HKD. I had to endure a 30% paper loss for most part, and reflect on why I had not insist on a larger margin of safety. Alibaba has since regain ground but appears to be selling off again for the last two trading days.
Central China Management (9982) and Central China Real Estate had a far, far worse fate. CCMGT was purchased from 1.77 HKD. Today it is only worth 0.88 HKD. Purchases for CCRE started at 1.17 and today it is worth half... at 0.58. Both of these are large positions. At present prices, it makes up for 13.7% of the entire portfolio (in terms of value). But on a cost basis, it is actually about 19%.
The case with Didi Global has been mentioned before so I shall not repeat it here.
With the exception of Central China RE (which I sold my parents' stake and reimburse them for the loss out of my own pocket, I do not wish for them to be exposed to this risk), I had not sell a single share for the rest of the counters. Unlike the sold down experienced by tech stock holders, these companies mentioned did not enjoy the post-COVID boom since 2020, and have contribute nothing but losses to my net worth. More frustratingly, none of them were bought during "good times."
China is also responsible for another holding of mine-- YZJ Finance Holdings. Over a span of two months, it managed to make a 20% gain, only for it to crumble again amidst China's debt issues again. The position is now in red.
Overall, there were no mercy from the markets in 22-H1... and it had been a year of continuous bad news.
Various positions in American exchange did not do well and all of them, except for the arbitrage position in Activision, is in loss of around 10-15%.
a) most market participants are not long term share holders. If they were, their annualized returns would have been low to normal due to lengthy time that share prices are depressed.
Sunday, June 19, 2022
June 2022 Portfolio Update
As of 19-June-2022:
S&P 500 Index Fund: -14.49% -> -19.97%
Hong Kong Tracker Fund: -14.91% -> -6.18%
Straits Times Index Fund: 3.02% -> 0.53%
My portfolio: -11.64% -> -2.63%
The rout in America continues, touching 20% before recovering briefly last Friday. Tech stocks has far too much weightage in the S&P. It was quite publicised that a handful of them are responsible for S&P 500's performance in 2021 (which I would remind everyone, it was 31.2%!).
The Hong Kong market has regain a fair amount of losses since last month, more than 8%. Given that my portfolio is evenly split between the Singapore and Hong Kong, my portfolio recovered by almost the same margin as well.
Performance is primarily supported by the TTJ's tender offer and Alibaba's rally of almost 20%.
Transactions:
a) Complete divestment of Carpenter Tan
In view of number of resignations from the board, I decided to liquidate the stock based on gut feelings. With the title of CEO returning to the founder, it is likely that growth will stall in time to come.
I note that inventory turnover has dipped somewhat, but it wasn't the deal breaker.
I took a small loss for the position and it is deeply disappointing as this was held for almost 4 years.
b) Initial and top of positions in Warner Brothers Discovery; Increase in Activision Blizzard
In view of the number of insider buying and due to personal reasons which I cannot disclose, I have bought a modest number of stock. Unfortunately, I could not reveal more.
c) Modest increase in CCRE
The timing was unusually good, although briefly, as prices shot up due to the local government taking a slice of the founder's stake at a convertible bond price of 1.2x, and a reasonable interest rate of almost 6%.
Price of CCRE has fallen back ex-dividend, so there isn't really anything to cheer about.
Commentary
The slump in cryptocurrency prices were pretty shocking, and as much as I hate to say this, it has a "this time it feels different" feel to it.
There are a few reasons why I think this way.
Despite the decentralized nature of the asset itself, exchanges are halting withdrawals slowly, and this would at least have a short term (days) effect on the market, since the idea of "not your wallet, not your tokens" would drive some to liquidate and observe at the sidelines.
The second reason is the layoffs in many crypto exchanges, or at least suspension in hiring. I know Binance said that they are hiring, but I do not think they are trustworthy.
Lastly, there could be massive forced liquidation by funds, judging by the break of support prices in Bitcoin.
So I think it is largely a matter of trust and falling dominos. I take a very neutral stand on cryptocurrencies after the Ukraine war. Given how difficult it is to value these assets, I give them a skip.
This is a pretty mute month, that is it for now.
-boonsong
Thursday, May 26, 2022
TTJ: Voluntary Conditional Offer
Objective
This post attempts to fulfill two objectives. First, it seeks to demonstrate that the value in TTJ ("company"), even when conservatively considered, is leaps and bounds higher than the conditional cash offer. The exercise does not involve by plainly looking at the Net Asset Value stated in their books, but a practical and simple way of assessing things.
The second, is how I felt about the whole situation, what one should realistically expect as a shareholder, and what I had learnt from this episode.
Back of the envelope valuation of TTJ
As we go along, keep in mind, the offer from THC Ventures is 0.23$ a share, or a total consideration (for 349.5m shares), 80.385m.
The value of TTJ are primary in 3 areas, liquid assets, properties, and the structural steel business.
Liquid Assets
|
|
Stated
value (31-Jan-2022) |
After
Discount (Discount %) |
|
Cash and
equivalent |
29.152 |
29.152m |
|
Trade and
Receivables |
24.2m |
20.6m
(15%) |
|
Contract
Assets |
34.7m |
27.7m
(20%) |
The first step is to consider the more liquid assets of the company, namely cash, receivables and contract assets. Then, we proceed to apply a discount to each asset according. In case of cash, there is zero need to discount it-- after all, cash is cash. As for receivables ($ owe to the company by customers), 15% is applied in case of counterparty risk. (Do take note: no discount is applied to any liabilities, include account payables.)
Since there is a fair amount of judgement needed, a 20% discount to the value stated is reasonable.
The sum of these assets, discounted, is 77.452m
Properties
TTJ has property (both leasehold and freehold), that are either in the books, or disposed. For asset not sold, the acquisition cost price of the asset would be used. After all, if the price is not reasonable, why did management purchase it?
We will omit the property at 57 Pioneer Road as there is only 2 years left on lease, although I recognize that there is definitely value in it, and hence left out in this exercise.
1) Disposed factory at Johor Bahru
valued at 13.377m SGD
2) Factory in Chachoengsao District, the Kingdom of Thailand
for the purpose of wood pellet business which is suspended.
Acquired at cost: 5.95m
Source: http://www.ttj.com.sg/newsroom/yr2018/TTJ_Proposed_Acquisition_of_Assets_in_Thailand.pdf
3) Factory in 51 Shipyard Crescent
for the purpose of wood pellet business which is suspended.
Acquired at cost: 16.81m
Source: http://www.ttj.com.sg/newsroom/yr2018/TTJ_Proposed_Acquisition_BFI_announcement.pdf
Due to the cyclical nature of the business, it is more prudent to look at long term earnings of the company. Figures below are extracted from annual reports of each year, usually classified under Note 4 "Financial Information by Operating Segments."
Profit
Before Tax for Structural Steel business
2009 15.891m
2010 6.244m
2011 12.818m
2012 14.042m
2013 9.297m
2014 14.630m
2015 5.152m
2016 19.562m
2017 9.894m
2018 9.898
2019 5.022m
2020 -3.526m
2021 10.952m
Average:
9.99m
Median: 9.89m
Applying a
tax rate of 17%, it is 8.217m, and applying a conservative multiple of 7 times,
the structural steel business is worth about 56m. Even at the worst year
earnings of 5.022m (post tax: 4.17m), it is worth about 28m.
Take note that Mr Teo has always run his business prudently, outlasting many of its peers. It has an order book of 187m, which are projects that will run between this year till 2024.
Summary
|
|
Stated
value (31-Jan-2022) |
After
Discount (Discount %) |
|
Cash and
equivalent |
29.152 |
29.152m |
|
Trade and
Receivables |
24.2m |
20.6m
(15%) |
|
Contract
Assets |
34.7m |
27.7m
(20%) |
|
|
|
|
|
Sales/Disposal/Acquisition
of factories/offices |
|
|
|
JB
factory |
13.37m (disposed) |
13.37m |
|
Thailand
factory |
5.95m (at cost) |
5.95m |
|
Singapore
(51 Shipyard Cresc) |
16.81m (at cost) |
16.81m |
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Assets |
|
113.582m |
|
Total
liabilities |
26.695m |
26.695m (no discount) |
|
Value of TTJ (without accounting for structural steel business; and 57
Pioneer Road leasehold property) |
|
86.887m or $0.248 per share |
|
Estimation
of Structural Steel Business |
|
a) Based
on worst year earnings: 28m |
|
Value of
TTJ with Structural Steel Business |
|
a) Based
on worst year earnings: b) Based on median year earnings: 142.515m,
or $0.409 a share |
|
Stated
Net Asset Value (from half yearly result, announced Mar 2022) |
|
128.582m,
or $0.3679 a share |
|
Voluntary
Conditional Cash Offer |
|
80.385m,
or $0.23 a share |
My Opinion
A reasonable assessment of the company's value, even without considering the structural steel business, is at least modestly more than the offer.
Mr Teo has been widely thought of as shareholder friendly, honest and forth-coming. This move to buy out, using a company to circumvent takeover codes, is very surprising and disappointing.
Surely he wouldn't want his company, in the many years to come, to be quoted as the reason why a certain Singapore Exchange rule was birthed, out of the need to patch a certain loophole? Reputation is priceless.
I would be very fair and say that as minority shareholders, it is not reasonable to expect 40 over cents (that is the value, in my head, for optimal price + premium for control. Your value might differ.). Firstly, Mr Teo could have carried on status quo for as long as he likes. Secondly, he assumed the risk and effort in building up the company. Sure, as a listed company, there is a a minimum amount of public shareholders required, and credit is easier to access as a listed entity.
Meeting at middle ground is a far more balanced and fair approach to both shareholders and management, leaving both parties feeling that nothing is lost or taken away. I note that in the offer document, under note 2(e), that the offer is not fixed. So I am hopeful.
Lastly, as a note to myself, this episode reminded me that cigar butt investing is fraught with danger. Cheap companies (even with asset value modestly discounted), with low returns on equity, required countless injection of capital over the years, as the price keep falling.
When one pursues this approach, he or she will feel immense unease-- that prices will remain depressed for years, or worse, got acquired with an offer as unsatisfactory as this. I have success with this approach in the past, but this is not one of them. However, it is a very good lesson.
-as of writing, TTJ weighs 9.81% of the entire portfolio. I have been a shareholder since 2017.
-
Portfolio Returns: 99.3% STI: 29.2% Tracker: 25.6% S&P 500: 13.35% I believe returns should be correct this time round since Evan of Sto...
-
You have definitely heard this line somewhere: Invest in blue chips. They are less risky. This is one of the most dangerous belief to ad...
May 2026 Portfolio Update
Both S&P and STI is about 10% at the moment, while HSI is looking at about negative 1%. This year is not a great year... I am on 4% at t...





